BackgroundTigecycline is a vital antibiotic treatment option for infections caused by multiresistant bacteria in the intensive care unit (ICU). Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a common complication in the ICU requiring continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT), but pharmacokinetic data for tigecycline in patients receiving CRRT are lacking.MethodsEleven patients mainly with intra-abdominal infections receiving either continuous veno-venous hemodialysis (CVVHD, n = 8) or hemodiafiltration (CVVHDF, n = 3) were enrolled, and plasma as well as effluent samples were collected according to a rich sampling schedule. Total and free tigecycline was determined by ultrafiltration and high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC)-UV. Population pharmacokinetic modeling using NONMEM® 7.4 was used to determine the pharmacokinetic parameters as well as the clearance of CVVHD and CVVHDF. Pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic target attainment analyses were performed to explore the potential need for dose adjustments of tigecycline in CRRT.ResultsA two-compartment population pharmacokinetic (PK) model was suitable to simultaneously describe the plasma PK and effluent measurements of tigecycline. Tigecycline dialysability was high, as indicated by the high mean saturation coefficients of 0.79 and 0.90 for CVVHD and CVVHDF, respectively, and in range of the concentration-dependent unbound fraction of tigecycline (45–94%). However, the contribution of CRRT to tigecycline clearance (CL) was only moderate (CLCVVHD: 1.69 L/h, CLCVVHDF: 2.71 L/h) in comparison with CLbody (physiological part of the total clearance) of 18.3 L/h. Bilirubin was identified as a covariate on CLbody in our collective, reducing the observed interindividual variability on CLbody from 58.6% to 43.6%. The probability of target attainment under CRRT for abdominal infections was ≥ 0.88 for minimal inhibitory concentration (MIC) values ≤ 0.5 mg/L and similar to patients without AKI.ConclusionsDespite high dialysability, dialysis clearance displayed only a minor contribution to tigecycline elimination, being in the range of renal elimination in patients without AKI. No dose adjustment of tigecycline seems necessary in CRRT.Trial registrationEudraCT, 2012–005617-39. Registered on 7 August 2013.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s13054-018-2278-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

AIMSThe aim of the present study was to assess the pharmacokinetics of total and unbound ceftriaxone in intensive care unit (ICU) patients and its protein binding characteristics. METHODSTwenty patients (m/f 15/5, age 25-86 years, body weight 60-121 kg, APACHE II 7-40, estimated glomerular filtration rate 19-157 ml min -1 , albumin 11.7-30.1 g l -1 , total bilirubin <0.1-36.1 mg dl -1 ) treated with intravenous ceftriaxone were recruited from two ICUs. Timed plasma samples were obtained using an opportunistic study protocol. Ceftriaxone concentrations were determined by high-performance liquid chromatography; unbound concentrations were determined after ultrafiltration using a new method which maintains physiological pH and temperature. The pharmacokinetics was described by a onecompartment model, the protein-binding characteristics by MichaelisMenten kinetics. RESULTSFor total drug, the volume of distribution was 20.2 l (median; interquartile range 15.6-24.5 l), the half-life 14.5 h (10.0-25.5 h) and the clearance 0.96 l h -1 (0.55-1.28 l h -1 ). The clearance of unbound drug was 1.91 l h -1 (1.46-6.20 l h -1 ) and linearly correlated with estimated glomerular filtration rate (slope 0.85, y-intercept 0.24 l h -1 , r 2 = 0.70). The unbound fraction was higher in ICU patients (33.0%; 20.2-44.5%) than reported in healthy volunteers, particularly when renal impairment or severe hyperbilirubinaemia was present. In all patients, unbound concentrations during treatment with ceftriaxone 2 g once daily remained above the EUCAST susceptibility breakpoint (≤1 mg l -1 ) throughout the whole dosing interval.

No abstract

No abstract

Drug exposure after standard doses of linezolid is highly variable and difficult to predict in ICU patients, and therapeutic drug monitoring seems advisable. PK drug-drug interactions might partly be responsible and should be further investigated; protein binding appears to be stable and irrelevant.